Commenting Rules

Readers are welcome to post comments on the material posted here, but some simple rules apply:

No trolls allowed

I reserve the right to refuse comments.

This site is meant to express my point of view. If you are looking for a soapbox to promote your own views, create your own website or blog site.

Comments should be brief (preferably under 100 words), polite, constructive and informed.

Comments which are simply attacks on myself, or are done in bad taste, or use rude language, or are possibly defamatory will not be posted.

You must state your full name to have your comments posted.

I may reply to some of your comments but will not be able to respond to all.

Needless to say, not everything found in the comments posted here are points of view I approve of or agree with.

If you are happy to abide by these rules, then by all means, send in your comments. Happy writing!

Perversion Versus Purity: The Homosexual War Against God

Sep 4, 2015

In America today they jail Christians, not for breaking any law, but for standing true to their Christian convictions. Kim Davis is now in jail because she had the audacity to resist the pink mafia, and to stand against judicial tyranny. That is what has now become of the land of the free.

Perversion is now politically protected, while marriage and family and purity are under attack. This is a war against Christianity, and of course a war against the One True God. A country founded on biblical principles and the notion of freedom, especially religious freedom, is now a nation at war with Christianity.

And as I mentioned, Kim Davis broke no laws. She upheld the laws of Kentucky, and for doing so, was jailed. Here is what the law states:

402.005 Definition of marriage. As used and recognized in the law of the Commonwealth, “marriage” refers only to the civil status, condition, or relation of one (1) man and one (1) woman united in law for life, for the discharge to each other and the community of the duties legally incumbent upon those whose association is founded on the distinction of sex. Effective: July 15, 1998 History: Created 1998 Ky. Acts ch. 258, sec. 4, effective July 15, 1998….
402.010 Degree of relationship that will bar marriage. (1) No marriage shall be contracted between persons who are nearer of kin to each other by consanguinity, whether of the whole or half-blood, than second cousins. (2) Marriages prohibited by subsection (1) of this section are incestuous and void. History: Amended 1946 Ky. Acts ch. 124, sec. 1. — Recodified 1942 Ky. Acts ch. 208, sec. 1, effective October 1, 1942, from Ky. Stat. sec. 2096.

And this:

Any clerk who knowingly issues a marriage license in violation of KRS Chapter 402 shall be guilty of a Class A misdemeanor. Any clerk who knowingly issues a marriage license to any persons prohibited by KRS Chapter 402 from marrying shall be fined $500 to $1,000 and removed from office by the judgment of the court in which convicted (KRS 402.990).

Also, in the 2004 election this ballot measure was passed by 75 per cent of Kentucky voters: “Amend the Kentucky Constitution ‘to provide that only a marriage between one man and one woman shall be a marriage in Kentucky, and that a legal status identical to or similar to marriage for unmarried individuals shall not be valid or recognized?’”

So everything Kim Davis did was to uphold the laws of the land. But for doing so, the power of the secular state – fuelled by the demonic wrath of the homosexual militants – came down upon her like a ton of bricks, and she is now languishing in jail.

I have already heard too many absolutely clueless and compromised Christians actually attacking her, and defending her persecutors. Mind-boggling. Even some thinkers who should know better have been a bit back and forth here. For example, one great commentator whom I often quote wrote a piece a few days ago and equivocated a bit about this case, so I did not run with anything of his.

It was indeed a superb piece and I am glad it helped Walsh to get a bit more clarity here. His entire article is well worth reading, but let me offer a few snippets from it:

The Obergefell v. Hodges decision had absolutely nothing to do with the law. Gay “marriage” was forced upon the states by five human beings in black robes sitting in a big stone temple in D.C. The Constitution, which clearly says nothing about gay “marriage,” was ignored. The consent of the people — many of whom live in states, like Kentucky, where the Constitution expressly defines marriage as between a man and a woman — was not respected or even considered. If Kim Davis is a government official making up her own laws as she goes along, she’s only following the precedent of the federal government. The only difference is that her “made-up” law is the one that existed before a handful of federal judges made up a new one. So who is the lawless anarchist here?
Gay “marriage” is itself nothing but the will of the elites. It is as much a legal abomination as a moral one. Many people have said, “Well, gay ‘marriage’ is the law of the land, so that’s that,” but what they mean is, “Well, five people in Washington support gay ‘marriage,’ so that’s that.” No, that isn’t that. That’s tyranny. That’s injustice. That’s illegal. It might be true that the Supreme Court has, over time, seized the power to write laws and reshape ancient human institutions according to their radical liberal ideologies, but that doesn’t make it law. It might be “law,” but it isn’t law. Just as gay “marriage” might be “marriage,” but it can never be marriage. The whole thing is a travesty, a sham, an outrage.
So are we morally obligated to cooperate with the evil agendas and the rampant tyrannies of the federal government? Is a clerk in Kentucky, elected by the people of her county and subject to the Constitution of her state, morally required to respect the drunken dictates of judicial activists in Washington? Kim Davis says no. And I think it might be time for the rest of us to come to that same conclusion.

Third, Kim Davis is not preventing anyone from getting married. For one thing, they can just hop in the car and head on down to the next county. It will take a few minutes, but I suspect they’ll survive. Any gay couples waiting around for this Davis situation to be settled are obviously just trying to make a statement, which is probably why they showed up at the clerk’s office with a camera crew.
But for another thing, gay “marriage,” even if it’s legitimized with the obligatory paperwork, still cannot exist. Gay “marriage” is an impossibility, a non sequitur. It has been not only illegally imposed on us, but impossibly. No matter what the Supreme Court says, or what anyone says, men and women will still be different. And it is that difference that defines marriage, that breathes life into it, that gives it a purpose, that makes it integral to society.
We have, then, two different things. On the one hand, we have the relationship between a man and a woman. On the other, the relationship between men and men or women and women. Say what you want about these groups, but you certainly cannot say they are the same. Since the beginning of human civilization up until about 87 seconds ago, all societies have recognized that the man-woman relationship is special and powerful. This bond gives birth to new people, and this new collection of people are what we call “families,” and these families serve as the very bedrock and foundation of humanity. There are other reasons for marriage, but procreation is a primary and defining reason. A relationship that is, in principle (not through deformity or disease or old age or whatever), lacking in this immense and mysterious power cannot be considered its equal. This is not just a moral judgment, but a logical and biological one.
Gay couples cannot produce families. They cannot produce anything. They serve no practical purpose to society. Two men love each other, fine, but there is no reason to officially recognize that love or give it a name. And if we do give it a name, it is absurd to give it the same name when it is so vastly different. The correct name is the one scripture gives it: sin.

Fifth, so here we are. Kim Davis sits in jail. Gay “marriage” has been illegally imposed on the people. The government is operating outside the bounds of the Constitution, morality and Natural Law. Christians in government are being locked in chains while thugs and crooks run the country. Babies are being murdered and sold for parts, and all with the approval and funding of our leaders in Washington. Cops are being hunted down and murdered in the street while race hustlers openly egg on the killers and the president does nothing to stop it.
America is ruled by the whims of petty despots. America is a lawless country. They will make a sacrifice of Kim Davis, but make no mistake that she is standing against lawlessness, not for it. And now the rest of us have to decide if we will do the same.
This is a nation that has rejected truth, constitutional law and God’s law. Our culture is floating untethered in the abyss, besieged by confusion and moral chaos. If we think we can restore peace and truth by “following the law,” I believe we are in for a rude awakening. The law is dead. We are left with two choices: follow truth, or obey the dictates of our culture and the godless tyrants who lead it.
Kim Davis took door No. 1, and it landed her behind bars.
Where will it take us if we open it?
I think we will soon find out.

We sure are finding out. The trouble is, some of us have been warning about this for decades now. We insisted that the greatest assault on faith, family and freedom would come at the hands of the homosexual activists. The media and the other side of course laughed at us. And I had plenty of Christians laugh at me as well.

But now as Christians are being jailed, losing their jobs, and being heavily fined, it may be time to say, “We told you so.” Yet incredibly many Christians are still fully asleep, utterly clueless as to the war that has been declared against them.

The founding fathers never had this in mind when they created the constitution. It was created to protect us from the government not the other way around. The perversions of the people are going to be the downfall of America!

Thanks, Tammy.
I agree with you on the original intent and meaning of the Constitution, but alas, we face a very powerful Leftist, Marxist lobby who:
1. Do not believe in the Constitution, let alone its original meaning. They are out for a revolution which turns all social institutions and traditions of mankind on their collective head, the traditional family in particular.
2. Do not really believe in the rule of law – except when it suits their programme. Just observe how they crow about how Kim Davis should obey the law and issue those marriage licences, but yet they violate the laws, say against community violence, or the “hate speech” laws on a daily basis.
3. Do not believe in the classic freedoms – of speech, of religious expression, of conscience, of assembly, etc. Again, they do when it suits themselves and their programme. “Freedom for me, but not for thee” is their unstated premise.

As to the rights of states, the 10th Amendment says, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.” However, it can be argued that this provision was overridden when Robert E. Lee signed the surrender at Appomattox Court House in 1865. What resulted was that the Union had siezed potentially absolute power over the states – by force of arms. It has taken a long time for this to work itself out, but I’m sure there are lawyers in the U.S. who would argue that “states’ rights” are trumped by Federal power, and that that includes marriage. So a 2004 plebiscite in favour of traditional marriage means nothing, and Kim Davis can say and do what she likes, the response would be that “the Fed” has the power, and can impose its will.

Whether this means that a bare majority of judges on the Supreme Court (as opposed to Congress) can make law I still very much doubt. Judicial activism, while not an entirely recent phenomenon, has been ruthlessly exploited by the Left to its advantage in recent times, not least by the Supreme Court decision on 26th June.

So in all, I believe that it is farewell to the United States as we have known it, the U.S.A. as a beacon of liberty, and a righteous nation under God. There is no turning back now, and Christians in America must face up to and look forward to “the rule of the poofs”, and all the horrors that accompany it.

Is this pessimism? Yes, it is, on one hand, but I believe that what we are now facing is the final, world-wide tribulation, beyond which is the Second Coming. What must be asserted here are two things: (i) our heavenly citizenship is primary (Phil.3:20); (ii) “Christendom”, this mutual, symbiotic relationship of Church and State, Church and community, is now a thing of the past. Church and State are now mutual enemies. Get used to it!

And to all the post-millennial fantasists out there, who think that some sort of world-wide revival will follow this “temporary blip” which we presently observe: I have an “eschatology of victory” – the Second Coming! That’s the Bible’s eschatology of victory. Until then, we face conflict and persecution – that’s the Biblical teaching as I see it, especially in the book of Revelation. The faithful church must now be in “Second Coming mode” more than ever.

@Murray
“Is this pessimism? Yes, it is, on one hand, but I believe that what we are now facing is the final, world-wide tribulation, beyond which is the Second Coming”
Don’t withdraw completely yet. After all, there was a time when anti-Christian Soviet communism must have seem unstoppable to Russian Christians but that’s gone now.
Having said that, with the situation in America much depends on the American Christians. Will they get off their couches and take action against such evil?

Yes, I agree with Mark Wong. There is two thousand years history of Christians acting as salt and light in reforming society, against impossible odds. The notion that we just wait for the rapture is fatalistic. This is not the time for battening down the hatches but getting out there into the fray.

The progressives are already playing the ad-hominem; their favorite tactic. Like all human beings, she is fallen and sinful. In no way does this make her a hypocritical Christian as the left delight in pointing out. God Bless Kim Davis.

Are all of us strong enough to make a similar sacrifice, or will we deny Christ when challenged?

Kim Davis is a new Christian, and she has put many Christians to shame. She has conducted herself admirably in the face of another well organized attack, and stood for truth. I hope this story becomes well known because it is should be becoming obvious to everyone on just who is bullying who.

Marriage is not a subjective affair, existing solely in the mind or imagination. It is an objective reality that never changes. It is God’s creating the total union of one man and one women which no man may break asunder – for the primary purpose of continuing what He had initiated: Creation. God could have created the women from the man simply for companionship and left it at that. But he so designed them that they would cleave to one another and become one flesh and from that union produce the next generation.

Same -sex marriage is a simulacrum that exists only in the minds of gays but it does not exist in reality. The gay lobby made a huge noise about how much they wanted marriage, enabling Cameron to steam roller same- sex marriage through Parliament in 2013. The campaign Out4Marriage had MPs, Peers, clergy and celebrities were falling over themselves to say how much they were out for marriage and that we were on the brink of an avalanche of gay men and women who were going to rush to altar [1]

But according to Office of National Statistics, since March 2014 when SSM became legalised, only 0.3% of the gay population, or 0.005% of the UK population have entered SSM1400 same sex marriages. What the gays want is not marriage but to destroy it and gain access to a prize commodity- children.

What we are dealing with here is a section of society who are seriously deluded and who have been allowed to redefine reality. In the name of equality we too have the right to redefine it. Let’s have a level playing field. There was a case of two lesbians in South Africa who demanded that a little boy call one of them “daddy.” Now because the child would not play they game they killed him [2] Now we are not toddlers but grown adults. Therefore when these odd couples, bisexuals and transsexuals come and ask us for cakes, bed and breakfasts, in fact all our goods and services, including our children, we humour them and hand over pretend cakes, double beds and children etc. – photographs, or simply pieces of paper with the word, “cake” or “double bed” written on them- but never ever real children or double beds. This is our human right as much as it is theirs to see reality how we wish. Fair does.

Homosexuality is no more real than those who think they are dogs [3], or the Wizard of Oz [4].
All who consider themselves to be homosexuals are dangerous. If they want to be air stewards OK but never let them take control of children or a real plane full of real passengers [5]

Mark,
You urged, “Don’t withdraw completely yet.”
Who said anything about withdrawing? This is the whole trouble I encounter whenever I or anyone else talks about eschatology in this kind of context. People will inevitably rush to conclusions and impute to me positions or policies which I do not hold, e.g. that I advocate sitting on our hands and waiting for the Second Coming – just round the corner; or that I advocate “rapture” doctrine, or whatever.

What I am saying is that as Christian we must face a situation which is very new to us: being an alien community in a hostile environment. We must stand in these evil days, and having done all, stand (Eph 6:13), but in the meantime, be occupied with the Master’s business.

In these times our heavenly citizenship must be primary, our citizenship of the United States, or Britain, or Australia must be secondary, and if the civilization of the West is to crumble around our ears we must be prepared to let go, painful though it may be. God has made no covenant promises to the U.S.A. or Australia as He did to Israel. Augustine as a faithful Roman citizen in the fifth century saw this clearly, and though it was painful for him to see the Roman world collapsing he took comfort in the fact that he was a citizen of the City of God. We need to hear that message again in our times.

You remind me of the collapse of Communism, but that was merely a false dawn in an inexorable and ongoing pattern of decline and degeneration. The West has been in decline since (at least) the end of World War I; now we are facing its imminent collapse, and its obsession with sexual perversion is itself a sign of God’s wrath and judgment on the West – and that is a message we hear little of, from Christian circles especially.

@David Skinner : Hi David 🙂 I always read your comments & find them insightful but I’ve got to say that I’m with others in the comments of the first link – “David Pauley (1 year ago) Having listened to MacArthur for decades, having read many of is books, not one assertion you have made about what MacArthur teaches is correct. You’ve misrepresented him at every point.” John MacArthur of all the sermons I have heard recently has been absolutely astoundingly courageous in reference for the strength of the gospel at this time. I sight this sermon (https://youtu.be/ATv9q2BkRus) just as a small example 😉 God Bless

@ Murray
I’m afraid I don’t understand exactly what ‘Second Coming mode’ is. How is it different from the way Christians are to live in all ages and eras? After all, we do not know the time when the Master will come.

Also, your put-down of ‘post-millennial fanaticists’ is unhelpful. While post-millennialism may be a minority view today, it was the majority view of the Puritans and of most Presbyterians until WW1. And surely is it possible for God to send his Holy Spirit wherever he chooses to accomplish whatever he chooses, including revival? To say otherwise is to deny that God is truly God.

Nevertheless, I share your grave concerns for the Western nations which surely are ripe for God’s judgment.

Thanks, Graeme.
I’ll try to be brief in my response, but first let me commend you for engaging in discussion. In these times there is such confusion that only serious discussion and debate can help to sort out.

First the matter of “Second Coming mode”. The Second Coming is “the blessed hope” (Tit 2:13), and the prayer of the church until the end of this age (Rev.22:20). But there have been many times in Church history when that hope has been either forgotten, minimised, displaced, or whatever. The second century is one example, the Middle Ages is another. And right now one can go from one church to another and they either don’t want to know about it, or else they give it lip service but then get on with other matters.

Post-millennialism has its part to play here: all the post-mill literature I have read, and the post-mill people I have debated have all had one thing in common – postponing the Second Coming to the far future such that it has no relevance to our lives now. They are too obsessed with “kingdom building” (however that is conceived), and church programmes to be interested. This stress on “farness” rather than “nearness” is contrary to the NT (see Phil.4:5; James 5:8; Rev.1:3).

You complained that I branded post-millennialists as “fanaticists”. You need to read carefully what I did say: I called them “fantasists”, because I believe firmly that post-millennialism is a fantasy. One has only to read Loraine Boettner’s book, “The Millennium” where has has a chapter devoted to how the world is getting better! Yeah, right! This is la-la-land stuff. Moreover, there is no Scriptural warrant for some sort of a Gospel “golden age” before Christ comes. It is all rather based on a theological premise that God’s grace must triumph in this world before the end comes; then it goes on to disdain “pessimism”, and talk up the possibility of revival. At best this is mere theologizing; at worst it is an appeal to the emotions and playing on heartstrings.

On the issue of revival, parallels are often drawn between the early C18th and our own day. I believe those parallels are illusory, and based on a superficial misreading of history – a kind of evangelical romanticism.

As to Puritan and Presbyterian beliefs, Peter Toon has argued in his book, “Puritans, The Millennium, and the Future of Israel” that Puritan belief in particular was not solidly post-mill, but much more variegated than say the likes of Iain Murray (“The Puritan Hope”) would have us believe. Whatever, having done a fair bit of study of the subject I am these days of a firm belief that millennialism in all its forms, pre- or post-, is a by-path meadow at best, a serious error at worst, particularly post-millennialism.

Whatever, what is now called a-millennialism is in fact the historic faith of the church as to eschatology, in particular because it places its focus where the Bible places it: on our Lord’s return, the “blessed hope”.

@Murray
“What I am saying is that as Christian we must face a situation which is very new to us: being an alien community in a hostile environment.”
In that case, I do not disagree with you. Sorry if I sounded like I put you down.

All kinds of excuses and justifications are created by those persisting in the homosexual lifestyle.
All kinds of excuses and justifications are created by straights who don’t like the idea of God having standards that Christians promote.

The US culture has been overtaken by people zealously enamoured by the knowledge imparted by self-aggrandizing college professors who also learned to rebel against God.

Welcome to the new world of God’s standards being not only ignored, but legislated out of existence. I guess the new liberal mantra is “while you can’t legislate ‘morality’, you CAN legislate ‘immorality.”

FYI: The first two hundred years of our criminal justice system was based on legislating Biblical morality. I regret my ignorance when an atheist, likely lesbian city attorney I worked with 40 years ago proclaimed in her condescending tone: “you can’t legislate morality.” Hopefully she has been provided a very warm spot for eternity.

About CultureWatch

We live in an age where we see evidence of cultural decline, the erosion of values, the decline of civility, the denial of truth and the elevation of unreason. Many people are asking, “Where is our culture heading?” This website is devoted to exploring the major cultural, social and political issues of the day. It offers reflection and commentary drawing upon the wealth of wisdom found in the Judeo-Christian tradition. It offers reflective and incisive commentary on a wide range of issues, helping to sort through the maze of competing opinions, worldviews, ideologies and value systems. It will discuss critically and soberly where our culture is heading. Happy reading!